ISLAMABAD:
Supreme Court Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah has urged the Judicial Commission of Pakistan (JCP) to share the minutes of all its meetings during tenure of Chief Justice of Pakistan Yahya Afridi.
In a letter written on June 25 to the JCP secretary, Justice Shah raised concern for not sharing the minutes of the JCP meetings to the public.
“I raise an issue of institutional concern: the commission’s discontinuation of the practice of releasing the minutes of its meetings to the public,” says the letter.
Justice Shah believes that the judiciary, as a trend-setter for other state institutions, must hold itself to the highest standards of openness and public accountability.
“The appointment of judges is a public act with far-reaching consequences. The people of Pakistan have a right to know how the judges of the top court in the country are selected, what deliberations take place, and whether constitutional standards are applied in good faith.
“The opacity that now surrounds the Commission’s workings is not healthy, not democratic, and not consistent with the Supreme Court’s image as the guardian of constitutional values,” says the letter.
He; therefore, urges the commission that the minutes of all JCP meetings held during the tenure of the current chairperson (CJP Afridi) be released to the public, in accordance with past practice.
Abdul Moiz Jaferii advocate said that the central premise of the newly instituted processes related to the judiciary was that the method and process of judicial appointments be made more transparent.
A basic feature of this transparency was the releasing of minutes which let the people see the process of determination. This has now ceased. Without reason, he adds.
After the passage of the 26th Constitutional Amendment, the executive has dominancy in the process of judges appointment as well as selection of judges for the constitutional benches.
There is no explanation as why the senior judges were not nominated for constitutional benches in Supreme Court as well as Sindh High Court.
There is no explanation as to why dissenting judges are being sidelined by the commission.
Recently, the JCP ignored the appointment of senior most judges for their appointment as chief justices of the high court.
A lawyer says that they were just ignored because they were not government’s like-minded’ judges.
Similarly, with valid reason, some senior judges, especially Peshawar High Court Judge Ejaz Anwar, were not nominated for the appointment of SC judge.
There is no explanation as how the JCP altered its opinion about a judge whose integrity was under question one year ago.
It is also witnessed that majority of the government-backed lawyers are appointed as judges of the high courts during the tenure of CJP Afridi.
The lawyers whose integrity and competency are beyond doubt were not nominated for appointments as they were not the government’s like-minded’
CJP Afridi so far could not evolve a strategy to minimise the influence of executive in the appointment of judges.
Around 50 judges are appointed in high courts as well as Supreme Court after passage of 26th constitutional amendment.
During the tenure of ex-CJP Qazi Faez Isa, minutes of committee working under the Supreme Court Practice and Procedure Act was being shared on the Supreme Court website. However, this practice has been discontinued during ex CJP Yahya Afridi tenure.